hc1@bale.cis.ufl.edu (Harry Campbell) (06/17/91)
From: hc1@bale.cis.ufl.edu (Harry Campbell) Some time ago there was an article here that requested, among other things, information about the Isreali Merkava Main Battle Tank, and how it stacked up to the M1 Abrams. This article is meant as a reply to that one. The Merkava is unique as main battle tanks go, in that the engine and fuel are located in the front part of the tank. The crew compartment and the turret are moved toward the rear. This unusual design feature is just one example of the Isreali emphasis on crew survivability. Considering a general shortage of man-power in an all out war, and the expense and time required to adequately train a tank crew, it is understandable why they should be so preoccupied with this aspect of tank design. Not only is the engine in the front to absorb incoming fire, but the armor on the Merkava is extremely heavy to the front and side, and it is well sloped to increase the effective thickness. The ammunition is stored down in the hull where it is less likely to be hit. With the Merkava Mk III the Isrealis store each round in a seperate container, to avoid spreading of amunition fires (though this will probably slow the rate of fire). The tanks are equiped with anti-fire and anti-detonation devices. All tankers wear fire-proof clothing. The Isrealis learned, during the Yom Kippur war, what usually happens to a tank when it is knocked out: IT BURNS! Another unusual feature is the trap door in the rear of the hull. This allows the crew to escape quickly, while using the tank as cover to small arms fire. Due to the large crew compartment in the hull, it is possible to carry a squad of ten men if the ammunition load is cut in half. This allows the tank to be used as an insertion vehicle for special-forces and engineers, as well as pick up wounded soldiers. "On one occasion, a MERKAVA drove a group of paratroopers into a building occupied by the PLO." (Experiences) This emphasis on protection brings up a few interesing points. When Isreal invaded Lebanon their armored forces consisted of Merkava Mk I, M-60, and up-gunned Centurians. The protection afforded by the Merkava was so well documented that "Israeli conscripts want to be drawn only into armour battalions equipped with the MERKAVA MBT." (Experiences) According to the Isreali Defense Ministry not one crew member died as the result of a Merkava being hit by enemy fire throughout the two month engagement. The latest production model of the Merkava is the Mk III. It has been in service since 1989, and it is likely that the Isrealis have over 1000 of them. The tank is armed with a 120mm smoothbore cannon made by Isreali Military Industries. This gun is stabilized, has an advanced fire-control system, Hughs thermal sights, and the tank can carry 50 rounds of ammunition for it. Some have a .50 caliber Browning HMG mounted over the main gun. All have a co-axial 7.62mm FN-MAG, and two more mounted on the roof for the commander and loader. Another unique Merkava feature is a 60mm mortar, with 30 rounds that can be fired from inside the vehicle. The tank has an advanced "special" armor, which seems to be some sort of modular aplique armor. I can only guess that it is some sort of synthetic composite type similar to the StillBrew armor the Brittish have developed for the Chieftain. This is said to double the armor protection of the Merkava I, while adding only minimal weight (total weight is around 67 tons). This extra weight is offset by a vastly improved engine, and so the tank has a road speed of about 45 Km/h, and a range of around 400 km. The Merkava Mk III is a fine tank, perfect for support of infantry, as well as large-scale armoured assault. However the Isrealis chose crew protection over mobility. Their behemoth can go anywhere it wants, it just goes there real slow. Actually its speed isn't bad when compared to most MBT's (Challenger, Leopard II, AMX-40, M-60A3, T-72, etc), but the Abrams would run circles around it at 70km/hr road speed. The Merkava has superior armor protection, except on the turret front (where there ain't nothing better than the M-1). As far as fire-power they both shoot big 120mm smoothbores, and it is likely that either tank could kill the other within 1500m. It would probably come down to who fired first. The Merkavas are noted to be very reliable, but reports from Iraq seem to disuede the fear that the M-1 wouldn't hold up in the field, so this may not be much of an advantage. In a head to head fight (not as unlikely as some may think since the Egyptians have already placed orders with General Dynamics) It would be a virtual toss up, and depend on the tactical situation (no shit), but if the Abrams could use their supperior speed to get flank shots on the Merkava's then this could be a decisive factor (again this is a basic premise of armoured combat). Of course I'm American, so I'd take the M-1 any day. In conclusion the Merkava can definitely hold its own. The T-72 made its debut in Lebanon, and when the smoke cleared the Syrians were running home to mama leaving a lot of smoldering metal behind with 'made in Russia' stamped on it. Of course the Isreali elan played a large part, but their equipment lived up to the challenge. Harry E. Campbell Information for this article was found in: "Experiences of the Lebanon War," Military Technology, Vol. VIII, Issue 7, 1984. This seems to be a German based publication, but it is written in English, and is international in scope. For information write Monch Media, Inc. 1309 Vincent Place McLean, VA 22101 Tel.:(703)-790-5252 This address is from 1984, and may be out of date. I have only one issue of this magazine, and I don't know if it is published today. "Land Forces of the World," Christopher Chant, Crescent Books, New York, 1990.
decay@utcs.utoronto.ca (D. Kreindler) (06/20/91)
From: "D. Kreindler" <decay@utcs.utoronto.ca> In article <1991Jun18.073925.13802@amd.com> hc1@bale.cis.ufl.edu (Harry Campbell) writes: > >From: hc1@bale.cis.ufl.edu (Harry Campbell) > > >....The Merkava has superior armor protection, except >on the turret front (where there ain't nothing better than the M-1). I'm curious how this determined. One striking differences between the M-1 and the Merkava is turret geometery. Whereas the M-1 features a box-like turret (with a *vertical* turret front), the Merkava's turret resembles nothing so much as a one of George Lucas's Star Destroyers - the turret front is angled at least 50 degrees. Was this angulation accounted for when determining relative protection value?
rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com (System Administrator) (06/22/91)
From: rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com (System Administrator) In-Reply-To: message from hc1@bale.cis.ufl.edu Doesn't the tank sound alot like the old WWII Tiger. Big, slow etc. ---- ProLine: rsopicki@pro-amber Internet: rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com UUCP: crash!pro-amber!rsopicki ARPA: crash!pro-amber!rsopicki@nosc.mil
frank0@ibmpcug.co.uk (Frank Dunn) (06/24/91)
From: frank0@ibmpcug.co.uk (Frank Dunn) No, if anything the Merkava (Chariot) shows a correct application of battle field intell. The turret front is well sloped and is notably well designed in not offering the M-1 shell trap thats obvious from any frontal aspect of the M-1. The M-1 or rather XM-1 thats on display at Aberdeen Proving Grounds shows that the turret front isn't vertical. -- fdunn@cix fdunn@bix 100012,23 CIS Frank Dunn@MacTel "It must be jelly 'cos jam don't shake like that"
shahar@shum.huji.ac.il (shahar BROVENDER) (06/27/91)
From: shahar BROVENDER <shahar@shum.huji.ac.il> First, the BIG, SLOW claim - Merkava is BIG (almost 62 tons, too), but NOT very slow. It has a power/weight ratio of 1/19.2 in the Mk III version. True, this is not the 1/23.7 of the M1A1, but quite good, nevertheless especially since it is heavier. Additionally, the Merkava carries a greater weapon variety than the M1, namely the 120mm main gun, 1 coax and 1 commander MG's and a 60mm mortar. Thrid, the Merkava has elliminated one of the greatest fire hazrds (esp. in M60A1) - the turret is traversed electronically. I am not sure how the traverse mechanism is designed in M1, but the Merkava design team had to artificially slow the traverse. Front protection of the Merkava is (in my opinion) the best in the world - it is better to be fired at through armour and engine than armour alone. A problem of Mk I was fixed - the rear turret overhang provided a missile funnel. Marc A. Volovic via Shahar Brovender :wq